Staff Report #14
October 19, 2026
To All Commissioners
Re: Rapid Transit Operational Readiness Review Feedback
Recommendation
The Commission:
- DIRECT Administration to forward this report to the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee; and
- RECEIVE the report for information purposes.
Background
As set out in Staff Report #11, dated June 29, 2026, Council provided direction to the Commission to review the opportunities and recommendations set out in the Rapid Transit Operational Readiness Review and report back to Council on implementation including timing, operational considerations and resource implications.
The remainder of this report will provide details of the analysis completed for each of the recommendations as well as assessment for the implementation of same.
Recommendation 1 – With respect to Fare Collection and Boarding Practices, develop an expanded fare retail network and an implementation plan for all-door boarding for the Rapid Transit network.
Prior to receipt of the recommendations stemming from the Rapid Transit Operational Readiness Review, the Commission directed Administration to undertake an assessment of additional fare payment options including but not limited to open payment onboard (debit/credit tapping). In addition to the review of fare payment options, the consultant was also tasked with undertaking a review of the implications of moving to an all-door boarding scenario for the rapid transit service only. Staff Report #9, dated October 19, 2026 details the findings and recommended strategy going forward for the expansion of fare payment options and all door boarding.
Expanded Retail Network
In summary, with respect to an expanded fare retail network, the path forward being recommended for consideration in the fare payment option expansion involves both open payment and app-based fare payment. The expansion of these options is anticipated to reduce reliance on the current smart card program, and as such expansion of a fare retail network is not included as part of the recommended strategy moving forward. Smart cards can currently be revalued online or at multiple locations across the city.
Until such time as the Commission confirms a path forward for fare payment options and the appropriate budget is approved for implementation of same it is not recommended that any further action be taken with respect to an expansion of the fare retail network.
All Door Boarding for Rapid Transit Services
With respect to all-door boarding for the rapid transit service only, the review was unable to identify any peer transit system with similar operating conditions to LTC (RT stations that serve as stops for both RT services and regular conventional services) that offer all door boarding for RT only. The primary rationale for the current state is that having different boarding practices at the same stop which are dependent upon the route the bus is serving will create significant confusion for customers. As set out in Staff Report #10, dated October 19, 2026, consultation with the Accessible Public Transit Service Advisory Committee (APTSAC) as well as the CNIB and Vision Loss Rehabilitation recommended that the key factor in making bus stops accessible is consistency at every stop in the system. Early issues arose when the initial RT stations in the Downtown Loop were opened when they were designed with no bus stop pole included as part of the infrastructure. This resulted in significant confusion and complaints from customers with visual impairments that were unsure where to stand to catch the bus. As a result, temporary stop poles have been placed at these stations to provide for greater consistency. Having stops in the network that have different boarding and fare payment expectations depending on the route will result in a lack of consistency that will continue to lead to customer confusion.
The assessment also included the costs associated with a move to all door boarding for rapid transit which included but are not limited to the addition of fare inspectors on the RT service and additional hardware on RT buses which is slightly offset by projected time savings at stops as all door boarding can result in lesser dwell time depending on the number of passengers waiting to board. It is important to recognize that the assessments relating to time savings were based on a fully utilized RT corridor and would not be expected in the initial years of operation, as such, the costs of implementation would be fully expended prior to any projected offsets.
Given the aforementioned issues, the report does not recommend proceeding with all-door boarding at this time. However it should be noted that a move to all door boarding can be undertaken in the future as the ridership on the corridors grows, and the projected time savings can be recouped.
Recommendation 2 – With respect to Rapid Transit Vehicles, undertake discussions with New Flyer Industries Canada ULC regarding potential vehicle specification enhancements to support Rapid Transit operations, including feasibility, costs and implementation timelines.
Discussions with the bus manufacturer and peer properties to identify any new features that should be considered are part of the annual bus procurement process. Historically, bus procurement contracts have been issued for a five-year period with optional renewal terms and are based on a detailed bus specification. During the term of the contract, minor variations can be requested and can typically be accommodated in the next year’s build noting additional costs associated with these changes would be the responsibility of LTC as they are viewed as a variance from the agreed-upon specification.
A key consideration when making changes to bus specifications is whether the benefits associated with the change will outweigh the operational impacts of the change. The move to a completely different piece of equipment on a bus order (in the case of the East Leg, nine (9) buses or 3% of the fleet) results in the creation of an “orphan fleet”. In order to maintain this fleet, additional training for fleet employees is required and additional inventory storage space for the new equipment is required.
Typically changes to bus specifications are undertaken due to the availability of a new/improved technology, a best practice from peer transit systems, or in an effort to mitigate an issue that has been identified with the current bus specification. The Rapid Transit Operational Readiness Review identified a variation to the doors on RT buses which could marginally reduce dwell times when serving stops as they open wider and slightly faster. Similar to the assumptions relating to all-door boarding, the operational gains from this approach will only be achieved at stops with significant passenger activity. This level of activity is not anticipated in the initial years of operation, and as such, it would not be expected to achieve any operational gains to offset the incremental capital costs.
The nine (9) buses required for the East Leg of Rapid Transit have been ordered and are consistent with the remainder of the LTC fleet. Administration is not recommending making any changes to the bus specification for the South Leg when those buses are ordered. However, as operating experience with the RT network is gained and issues are identified consideration will be given to changes that should be considered with vehicle specifications going forward. LTC purchases approximately 20 buses each year as part of lifecycle maintenance and should a critical issue arise that needs to be addressed through a change to vehicle equipment serving the RT corridors, it can be accommodated through this process noting new buses with desired features would be purchased through the lifecycle process and the existing RT buses would transition to the base LTC fleet.
Recommendation 3 – With respect to Rapid Transit identity and Customer Comprehension, develop a Rapid Transit brand and identity, and associated communications and public awareness programs, to support the launch of the Rapid Transit system.
Brand and Identity
Throughout the development of the Rapid Transit Business Case process, discussion was held with consultants as to whether the RT service would be branded differently and if so, whether a branding exercise should be included in the project budget projections. The final business case did not include any budget allocations for a branding exercise, nor did it take into account any additional costs that may be associated with an alternative exterior bus design noting an alternate design would require additional buses in order to ensure an adequate spare fleet ratio to allow for buses to undergo regular maintenance and repairs while still having adequate fleet to deliver the service as scheduled. The buses for the East Leg have been ordered, and are scheduled to be delivered in Q2 2027. These buses are painted the same as the remainder of the LTC fleet.
The Commission’s 2027 operating budget which has been approved for submission to Council for consideration did not include any funding relating to the operation of the first RT leg, noting all costs associated with this project will be submitted in a separate business case. LTC Administration is working with civic Administration to determine the required operating budget for the service, assuming a Fall 2027 start date; however, no discussion has been held with respect to costs associated with a branding exercise. Work of this nature would require the assistance of a third party with experience in this type of review.
Should Council wish to include the projected costs associated with a RT branding exercise, as well as the costs associated with implementation of same in the RT Business Case, direction of that nature should be provided. Alternatively, the estimated costs associated with this initiative could be included in the RT Business Case as optional for Council consideration.
Public Awareness Programs
Consistent with the manner in which LTC Administration and civic Administration have worked collaboratively on communication campaigns relating to the implementation of the RT corridors to date, the same has been planned going forward. This collaboration has worked well to ensure that both current LTC customers (who are tuned into LTC social channels) and the general public (who are tuned into City of London social channels) are aware of the progress being made as well as changing operating environments for buses and drivers relating to the dedicated bus lanes and supporting infrastructure. As set out in Staff Report #13, dated October 19, 2026 LTC will also look to highlight the RT routes on the annual Ride Guide as they are implemented, and will undertake on-board communications relating to same as the implementation draws near.
Recommendation 4 – With respect to Rapid Transit Stations, review and implement remaining station enhancements to support safe, accessible and efficient Rapid Transit operations.
LTC Administration has worked closely with civic Administration throughout the planning and implementation of the RT project, most specifically with the elements directly related to transit services. As set out earlier in this report, the parties worked together to identify a temporary solution to the lack of bus stop signage at the RT stations in the core. Further, LTC has begun to utilize sections of the RT corridors as they are completed which provides the opportunity to gain experience with the new infrastructure and identify any concerns that may be able to be addressed in the stations that are not yet built.
Summary
As mentioned, the costs associated with each of the recommended initiatives have not been included in the LTC operating or capital budget programs for 2027. Should Council wish to move forward with any of these initiatives, it is recommended that direction be provided to Administration to bring business cases forward as part of the 2028-2031 Multi-Year Budget process. This approach does not exclude consideration of any of the recommendations in the future rather seeks to ensure adequate funding has been approved for implementation of same.
Recommended by:
David Butler, Director of Operations – Conventional
Craig Morneau, Director of Fleet & Facilities
Katie Burns, Director of Planning
Mike Gregor, Director of Finance
Concurred in by:
Kelly S. Paleczny, General Manager